Explain divergent verdicts on the Al–Mg–Zn τ-phase claim

Determine what separates the ClaimSpy runs that assign scores of +1 and +2 to the Al–Mg–Zn τ-phase claim when all runs obtain the same computed τ-phase fractions and use cards with the same existential quantifier and threshold.

Background

Five ClaimSpy runs on the Al–Mg–Zn τ-phase claim obtained the same computed τ-phase fractions near room temperature, yet produced scores of −1, +1, +1, +2, and +2. The cards used the same existential quantifier and threshold, so the paper does not establish why the runs producing +1 and +2 reached different verdicts.